Adrian wrote:

JohnB ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

Which of course should tell our Adrian chap he should read wot I wrote a
little more carefully and not jump in with his assumptions.

Not I making the incorrect assumptions, ol' chap.

Quite right. You were just down innattentive.

You were making
guesstimates of the "majority" VED rate which I suspect were way out...

You've missed by miles.

But, even so... More money than sense...

I've tried with such obvious clues, yet you still don't get it.

Better go for a lie down I suppose.

John B

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...
JohnB ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

Which of course should tell our Adrian chap he should read wot I wrote a
little more carefully and not jump in with his assumptions.

Not I making the incorrect assumptions, ol' chap. You were making
guesstimates of the "majority" VED rate which I suspect were way out...

But, even so... More money than sense...

Nah, you still haven't worked it out. He didn't spend 5.5 grand on a
bicycle. Nor did he spend 3 grand (or whatever it was) on a bicycle.

If I mention that the last bike I bought cost 450 quid in tax on frame and
fork alone (ok, front hub too), will you go all astounded at that? But I bet
you wouldn't find an equivalent cheaper.

Still, I've got all that spare cash from not paying to commute - I've got to
spend it somewhere!

cheers,
clive

Clive George ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Nah, you still haven't worked it out. He didn't spend 5.5 grand on a
bicycle. Nor did he spend 3 grand (or whatever it was) on a bicycle.

So John's telling porkies when he says he dropped over £500 tax on a bike,
too? Can we trust ANYTHING you lycralot say?

If I mention that the last bike I bought cost 450 quid in tax on frame
and fork alone (ok, front hub too), will you go all astounded at that?
But I bet you wouldn't find an equivalent cheaper.

But you're failing to explain to me what spending all that cash on a bike
*does* other than make you feel warm and fluffy and all Lance Armstrong.

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...
Clive George ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Nah, you still haven't worked it out. He didn't spend 5.5 grand on a
bicycle. Nor did he spend 3 grand (or whatever it was) on a bicycle.

So John's telling porkies when he says he dropped over £500 tax on a bike,
too?

Go and read the post again. There have been quite a few hints. No, John
isn't telling porkies.

If I mention that the last bike I bought cost 450 quid in tax on frame
and fork alone (ok, front hub too), will you go all astounded at that?
But I bet you wouldn't find an equivalent cheaper.

But you're failing to explain to me what spending all that cash on a bike
*does* other than make you feel warm and fluffy and all Lance Armstrong.

Comfort and handling mainly. The expensive bike is loads more comfortable at
certain critical moments, and is easier to keep upright. Is that enough of a
clue? (no, probably not. Never mind. All bikes are just like what Dixon of
Dock Green rode, there are no variations at all.)

cheers,
clive

Adrian wrote:

Clive George ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Nah, you still haven't worked it out. He didn't spend 5.5 grand on a
bicycle. Nor did he spend 3 grand (or whatever it was) on a bicycle.

So John's telling porkies when he says he dropped over £500 tax on a bike,
too?

Are you going to withdraw that allegation?

Can we trust ANYTHING you lycralot say?

smile
My word you must be very fit with all that digging.
Time to lie down and stretch out I think.

John B

Clive George ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Nah, you still haven't worked it out. He didn't spend 5.5 grand on a
bicycle. Nor did he spend 3 grand (or whatever it was) on a bicycle.

So John's telling porkies when he says he dropped over £500 tax on a
bike, too?

Go and read the post again. There have been quite a few hints. No,
John isn't telling porkies.

So there's some dissembling worthy of a senior government spin doctor going
on around here.

Forgive me, for I merely a stupid car driver and can't hope to keep pace
with you sneaky cyclists...

Let's do this s-l-o-w-l-y for my benefit...

But then the last cycle I bought contributed around five times more in
tax to the country's coffers than most people pay in VED :-(

He's stated elsewhere that he's based that on £105 VED, so £525. If that's
VAT, then that's a £3,525 bicycle.

So what other taxes are payable on a bicycle? Or are we playing with some
accounting shenanigans involving allocations of income tax or whatever?

But you're failing to explain to me what spending all that cash on a
bike *does* other than make you feel warm and fluffy and all Lance
Armstrong.

Comfort and handling mainly. The expensive bike is loads more
comfortable at certain critical moments, and is easier to keep
upright.

So it's perfectly acceptible to ride to the limits of handling on public
roads? OK...

JohnB ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

Are you going to withdraw that allegation?

No, I don't think I will, thanks.

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...
Clive George ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Nah, you still haven't worked it out. He didn't spend 5.5 grand on a
bicycle. Nor did he spend 3 grand (or whatever it was) on a bicycle.

So John's telling porkies when he says he dropped over £500 tax on a
bike, too?

Go and read the post again. There have been quite a few hints. No,
John isn't telling porkies.

So there's some dissembling worthy of a senior government spin doctor
going
on around here.

Nope. You're just missing the huge hints John kept dropping to you.

Forgive me, for I merely a stupid car driver and can't hope to keep pace
with you sneaky cyclists...

Let's do this s-l-o-w-l-y for my benefit...

But then the last cycle I bought contributed around five times more in
tax to the country's coffers than most people pay in VED :-(

He's stated elsewhere that he's based that on £105 VED, so £525. If that's
VAT, then that's a £3,525 bicycle.

So what other taxes are payable on a bicycle? Or are we playing with some
accounting shenanigans involving allocations of income tax or whatever?

Your mistake is nothing to do with the numbers. Read those bits above again,
a bit harder. The hint is you're making an assumption which is unfounded.

But you're failing to explain to me what spending all that cash on a
bike *does* other than make you feel warm and fluffy and all Lance
Armstrong.

Comfort and handling mainly. The expensive bike is loads more
comfortable at certain critical moments, and is easier to keep
upright.

So it's perfectly acceptible to ride to the limits of handling on public
roads? OK...

See, there you go again, making unfounded assumptions. I have no intention
at all of falling off on public roads.

Remember I mentioned Dixon of Dock Green? I may have been stretching the
truth just a little when I said all bikes were like what he rode.

BTW you really ought to withdraw that allegation that JohnB was lying - he
wasn't (well, not in that post, anyway).

cheers,
clive

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 15:28:34 GMT, "Alan"
said:

Surely it is far better for
the environment if *more* people cycled?

Not sure about that. Pink lycra is a serious environmental hazard.

--
David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

In article . 170,
Adrian wrote:
Fine. So - how DO we get red light cameras to recognise cyclists without
having plates on bikes?

Same way you catch the tailgating motorist; the fool with no
insurance; the unlicenced driver; the dangerous car with no MOT.
Coppers on the ground.

This is the primary reason why GATSOs are so dangerous - it's not
that those who speed don't deserve 3 points and a fine[1] - but that
senior police officers (and the HO) think that GATSOs are a replacment
for traffic police.

I've heard an estimate that 10% of drivers in London are uninsured.
Guess which concerns me (as a motorist!) mo idiot cyclists
jumping red lights or uninsured drivers? Which do you honestly
think will compromise my safty more? Frankly, getting all ****y
about cyclists is ********. Entertaining, though.

Mike

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver